SAE TECHNICAL

PAPER SERIES

2003-01-0698

Advanced Two-Actuator EUI and Emission

Reduction for Heavy-Duty Diesel Engines
Godfrey Greeves, Simon Tullis and Barrie Barker
Delphi Diesel Systems

Reprinted From: New Diesel Engines & Fuel Injection

(SP-1739)

2003 SAE World Congress

Detroit, Michigan
March 3-6, 2003
400 Commonwealth Drive, Warrendale, PA 15096-0001 U.S.A. Tel: (724) 776-4841 Fax: (724) 776-5760 Web: www.sae.org

All rights reserved. No part of this publication may be reproduced, stored in a retrieval system, or
transmitted, in any form or by any means, electronic, mechanical, photocopying, recording, or otherwise,
without the prior written permission of SAE.
For permission and licensing requests contact:
SAE Permissions
400 Commonwealth Drive
Warrendale, PA 15096-0001-USA
Email: permissions@sae.org
Fax:
724-772-4028
Tel:
724-772-4891

For multiple print copies contact:

SAE Customer Service
Tel:
877-606-7323 (inside USA and Canada)
Tel:
724-776-4970 (outside USA)
Fax:
724-776-1615
Email: CustomerService@sae.org
ISSN 0148-7191
Copyright 2003 SAE International
Positions and opinions advanced in this paper are those of the author(s) and not necessarily those of SAE.
The author is solely responsible for the content of the paper. A process is available by which discussions
will be printed with the paper if it is published in SAE Transactions.
Persons wishing to submit papers to be considered for presentation or publication by SAE should send the
manuscript or a 300 word abstract of a proposed manuscript to: Secretary, Engineering Meetings Board, SAE.
Printed in USA

2003-01-0698

Advanced Two-Actuator EUI and Emission Reduction for

Heavy-Duty Diesel Engines
Godfrey Greeves, Simon Tullis and Barrie Barker
Delphi Diesel Systems

Copyright 2003 SAE International

ABSTRACT
A very flexible choice of fuel injection characteristics can
be obtained with an advanced electronic unit injector that
has been developed with two electronically controlled
valves. Single-cylinder engine tests have demonstrated
the potential of this advanced EUI system for a heavyduty diesel engine. Substantial increases in injection
pressure can be programmed electronically at individual
engine speed/load conditions, compared with a baseline
EUI system, to provide much faster rates of air/fuel
mixing. Simulated US and European emissions cycle
results, with the optimised two-actuator EUI and EGR,
show substantially improved soot particulate versus NOx
results and lower BSFC compared with a baseline EUI
result. A high-pressure post injection has the potential to
give further soot reduction.

INTRODUCTION
Heavy-duty trucks with diesel engines need to meet
lower exhaust emission levels to comply with future
emission regulations, as proposed in areas such as the
USA and Europe. In particular there is a need to reduce
the exhaust mass emissions of NOx and particulate over
the appropriate emission test cycle.
Considerable
progress has already been achieved in reducing the
engine out emission of NOx and particulate to meet
current emission regulations. Advances in the fuel
injection equipment (FIE) have made an important
contribution to improving the in-cylinder diesel
combustion processes (1 - 5).
For the future even lower emission levels are required.
Some combination of further developments of the
combustion system and/or additional measures involving
exhaust aftertreatment systems will be required. This
could include a NOx reduction catalyst system, such as a
NOx absorber catalyst or a selective catalytic reduction
(SCR) system, requiring a carefully controlled injection of
urea (6). Alternatively, or in addition, the aftertreatment
system could include a diesel particulate filter (DPF)

system, which requires a means to provide adequate

regeneration of the DPF for in service conditions of the
vehicle. In general it is beneficial to further develop the
diesel engine combustion system to provide further
reductions in engine-out NOx and particulate emissions,
even when exhaust aftertreatment systems are to be
used.
For
example,
in-cylinder
combustion
improvements can help to reduce the urea consumption
needed for the SCR system and/or reduce the required
frequency of regeneration for a DPF system. Also there
is a continuing demand to increase the engine torque
and rated power output and to reduce the engine fuel
consumption.
This paper is concerned with FIE means to further
improve the diesel combustion process and to provide
lower engine-out levels of NOx and particulate. EGR can
be used to reduce engine-out NOx since the reduction in
oxygen concentration reduces the peak flame
temperature. Now we need to consider means to reduce
particulate.
The components of diesel particulate include sources
from the engine lubricating oil, sulphates, HC from the
fuel and soot formed during the combustion of the fuel.
Contributions from the lubricating oil component can be
reduced by engine design, sulphate by a low sulphur fuel
and HC by a low sac volume nozzle and sufficiently high
end of compression temperatures. The reduction of the
soot (or black smoke) is of primary concern here, in the
context of using high levels of exhaust gas recirculation,
to reduce the peak flame temperature and hence the
engine out NOx.
The rate of soot formation in diesel combustion is
controlled by a combination of air/fuel mixing and
chemical kinetic effects.
Basic work on diesel
combustion has shown that soot forms when locally fuelrich mixtures in a vapour phase are subjected to a high
temperature (7, 8, 9). In particular a semi-empirical
model was developed for soot formation. This showed
that the rate of soot formation is very sensitive to the

local time history of equivalence ratio and temperature as

each element of injected fuel passes through the
combustion process. The effects are very non-linear and
a small increase in mixing rate can give a large reduction
in soot emission. Consequently, from the FIE
perspective, the most effective means for reducing the
soot emission is to reduce the residence time of fuel-rich
mixtures. This can be done by increasing the rate of
air/fuel mixing for all elements of the injected fuel as they
mix and entrain oxygen during the combustion process.
This means that fast air/fuel mixing is needed both
globally and locally within the combustion chamber for all
operating conditions over the complete engine load and
speed range.
The continuing upward trend in the level of peak fuel
injection pressures used in the development of direct
injection (DI) diesel combustion systems, together with
engine combustion chamber and air charge
developments, have provided the improvements needed
so far for faster air/fuel mixing and hence soot reduction.
As the level of EGR is increased to reduce NOx the rate
of oxygen entrainment into the fuel is reduced which
increases the residence time of fuel-rich mixtures and
hence increases soot formation. The primary need is
therefore to find further improvements in the rate of
mixing in the fuel jets to compensate for the effect of
EGR on soot formation.
Current electronic unit injector (EUI) fuel injection
systems with a single electronically-controlled actuator,

CURRENT SINGLE-ACTUATOR EUI

One Valve
Spill Control
Valve [SCV]

such as the Delphi EUI 200, already provide a very

efficient way of generating high injection pressures with
good durability for heavy-duty diesel applications. This
system has produced substantial progress in emission
reduction for diesel engines (3, 5). The single-actuator
EUI system produces a given characteristic of injection
pressure level over the engine load and speed range.
Further combustion improvements might be expected if
the injection pressure level could be raised/adjusted at
individual speed/load conditions as in common rail fuel
injection systems (10, 11) used on light-duty diesel
engines.
Recently the authors' Company have developed an
advanced two-actuator EUI system to further improve
combustion performance. This provides the capability to
electronically programme different levels of injection
pressure at individual speed/load conditions. Also there
is an enhanced capability for multiple injections.
This paper gives results from engine test work on a
single-cylinder engine with a prototype two-actuator EUI
system to demonstrate the engine-out emissions benefits
which can be obtained.
TWO-ACTUATOR EUI FUEL INJECTION SYSTEM
PRINCIPLE OF TWO-ACTUATOR EUI OPERATION
Figure 1 shows a schematic of the two-actuator EUI
system and comparison with the single-actuator EUI.

ADVANCED TWO-ACTUATOR EUI

Two Valves
Spill Control
Valve [SCV]

Needle Control
Valve [NCV]
(NOP & NCP)

Figure 1 Schematic of single-actuator EUI and advanced two-actuator EUI

The pumping plunger is operated by the engine driven

cam. At the start of pumping fuel escapes through the
normally-open spill control valve (SCV). When the
electronically-controlled SCV is energised and closes,
the fuel pressure builds up in the system and when it is
opened fuel spills and the pressure collapses. The
second electronically controlled needle control valve
(NCV) allows the timing of the opening and the timing of
the closing of the nozzle needle to be determined
electronically. This is achieved by a valve which can
determine whether or not the pumped fuel pressure is
applied to the back of the nozzle needle. The nozzle
needle also has a return spring to ensure that the nozzle
needle is held closed when there is no pumping
pressure.
If the NCV valve is activated throughout the period when
the SCV is closed then the nozzle opens and closes
according to the nozzle opening pressure (NOP) and
nozzle closing pressure (NCP) set by the nozzle needle
return spring. This mode of operation and injection
characteristic is the same as that produced by the
current production single-actuator EUI system.
If the SCV valve is closed before the NCV valve is
activated, then fuel pressure can be pumped up to a
much higher level before the NCV is activated to allow
the nozzle needle to open. This provides a means of
substantially increasing the NOP and level of injection
pressure during injection. If towards the end of injection
the NCV valve is de-activated before the SCV is opened,
then the needle can be closed with a greatly increased
injection pressure and hence with a high NCP.

A3
Single Valve

Spill Control
Valve

These features provide the means of achieving a wide

variety of injection characteristics with substantial and
electronically programmable increases in the injection
pressure and the capability for multiple injection.
EUI PRODUCT EVOLUTION
Figure 2 shows sectional views of three different Delphi
Diesel Systems EUI products for heavy-duty diesel
engines. The A-type EUI has a single-actuator with a
side mounted electronically-controlled spill control valve
and has been in production since October 1988. The E1
EUI has a single actuator but with the spill control valve
mounted in a central position within the body of the
injector. This gives a much more compact arrangement
with shorter high pressure drillings, lower high pressure
volume and a substantial weight reduction. The E1 EUI
has been in production since June 2001.
The E3 EUI is a two-actuator EUI which commenced
production in 2002. This design incorporates both the
spill control valve and the needle control valve within the
same injector outline as the E1. The E3 operates on the
principles already outlined for two-actuator EUI as
described above.
EUI BUILDS USED FOR SINGLE-CYLINDER ENGINE
TEST WORK
The single-cylinder engine work reported here used a
number of different EUI builds as shown below.

EI

E3

Single
Valve

Two
Valve

Spill Control
Valve

Figure 2 Electronic Unit Injector(EUI) Evolution

Needle
Control
Valve

Table 1 EUI builds used in single-cylinder engine test

work
EUI
Number
Cam rate
Nozzle
Build
of
(mm/cam) Configuration
Actuators
No.x dia, mm
EUI (A)
One
0.38
8 x 0.18
(Reference)
8 x 0.18
EUI (B)
Two
0.38
8 x 0.20
EUI (E3)
Two
0.38
6 x 0.24
The reference EUI(A) is similar to a current production
single-actuator EUI as described in (3, 5) and
corresponds to an A3-type EUI as shown in Figure 2.
The EUI(B) is a prototype two-actuator design. The
EUI(E3) is a production two-actuator design as shown in
Figure 2.

SINGLE-CYLINDER
PROCEDURES

ENGINE

AND

TEST

ENGINE
The engine used for the test work was a Ricardo Proteus
single-cylinder engine with a swept volume of about 2
litres and a nominal compression ratio of 16.4:1
The version of the engine used for this work has a fourvalve cylinder head with a variable air swirl facility and
was specially designed for EUI systems. The combustion
bowl and air inlet ports were designed as a low-airmotion, near-quiescent combustion system. The lowest
air swirl setting was used for the test work described
here and corresponds to a momentum meter rig swirl
value of Rs=0.4.
The engine was run with a pressure charging system
and the boost pressure, boost temperature and exhaust
back pressure were set to values which were
representative of a turbocharged intercooled multicylinder truck engine.
Comparisons were made between multi and singlecylinder engine performance results to derive an engine
friction correction. The effect of the friction correction is
to increase the brake mean effective pressure measured
on the single-cylinder engine by 0.3 to 1.2 bar depending
on engine speed. This friction correction has been
applied to the calculation of total cycle results but not to
the results given for each mode.
TEST EQUIPMENT
The EUI and engine were instrumented for needle lift,
fuel injection pressure and cylinder pressure. A highspeed data-capture system was used to record these
transient measurements for subsequent analysis. Peak
fuel injection pressures were measured from these data.
It should be noted that the recorded needle lift diagrams
which will be presented below indicate an overshoot of

the needle beyond its maximum lift. This overshoot

should be ignored since it occurs within the needle lift
measurement transducer.
The engine was mounted on a steady-state test bed and
was fully instrumented for the measurement of
performance, smoke (AVL 415 smoke meter used for
FSN smoke unit results) and gaseous emissions (MEXA
7100).
Fuel consumption was measured by a
gravimetric method. CO2 measurements were made in
the exhaust and were used to calculate changes of
airflow, and hence levels of EGR.
The particulate emission was not measured directly but
derived from the smoke and HC measurements as
described previously (12). The smoke levels that were
measured in FSN smoke units were then converted to
mass units of soot particulate using the AVL correlation
supplied with the smoke meter. In this paper the
quantities defined by equations (1), (2), and (3) below
are used to calculate the total particulate emission as
follows.
Soot Particulate = 1.0 x
(g/m3)

Smoke
(g/m3)

(1)

HC Particulate = 0.27 x HC
(g/m3)
(g/m3)

(2)

Calculated Total = Soot +

Particulate
Particulate
(g/m3)
(g/m3)

HC (3)
Particulate
(g/m3)

The above calculated total particulate assumes that 27%

of the gaseous HC goes to SOF in the particulate that is
assuming no oxidation catalyst. An oxidation catalyst
could be used to greatly reduce the soluble organic
(SOF) part of the particulate with the requirement for a
low sulphur fuel to minimise formation of sulphate. This
paper is mainly concerned with reduction of the soot
component of the particulate rather than other
components of the particulate.
The engine was equipped with a simple EGR system as
described in (5). The percent EGR is defined as the
percent reduction in inlet air mass flow and was
calculated from the carbon balance as given in (5).
The boost inlet air was controlled to the same pressure
and temperature values as those when not using EGR.
The temperature of the mixture of air and re-circulated
exhaust gas at the inlet manifold was uncontrolled, ie no
EGR cooling was employed. Thus the simulated EGR
conditions correspond to recirculating uncooled exhaust
gas from up-stream of the turbine to downstream of the
inter-cooler, with increase of exhaust back pressure at
certain modes to enable EGR. It is assumed that the
baseline boost pressures can be maintained which may
require some change to the turbocharger match on the
multi-cylinder engine.

TEST MODES AND SIMULATED CYCLES

EFFECT OF DIFFERENT
PRESSURES (NCP)

The exploratory test work was done at a number of key

speed and load modes to explore basic responses. After
optimising parameters at selected conditions a full set of
steady-state test modes were run to give results for the
simulated emissions cycles. The overall cycle result was
then calculated from the sum of the emissions measured
at each mode after applying the corresponding modal
weighting factor.

Different settings of the SCV and NCV have been used

at the end of injection to produce different injection
pressure levels during the needle closure. The solid line
is for a relatively low NCP of 500 bar while the dotted and
chain dotted show progressively higher NCP. The
highest NCP gives a much sharper termination of the
injection rate diagram. It might be expected that a higher
injection pressure during needle closure as in a common
rail injection system would be beneficial to smoke and
BSFC. In fact the results show the opposite effect. As

ENGINE RESULTS FOR A SINGLE INJECTION

AT MODE 12 (1550/50%) AND MODE 19
(1900/100%) EUI(B)
A key mode 12 engine test condition of 1550 rev/min and
50% load was used to explore basic responses of the
combustion system to different injection characteristics.
This corresponds to a road load condition on a heavyduty truck. A baseline cam rate of 0.38 mm/deg cam
and nozzle configuration of 8 x 0.18 was previously found
to be best for EGR tests with the single-actuator EUI(A).
The test work below was run with the two-actuator
EUI(B) in Table 1 using nozzle configurations of 8 x 0.18
or 8 x 0.20.
CYLINDER PRESSURE

60

2000

50
40
30
20
10
0

1600

1200

Injection Rate (mm3/CA)

70

Injection Pressure (bar)

Cylinder Pressure (bar)

80

CLOSING

Figure 3 shows the needle lift, injection pressure,

injection rate and cylinder pressure diagrams for 3
settings of the EUI(B). These three diagram settings
were chosen to explore differences in the end of injection
while keeping conditions for the start and main part of
injection similar. For all three injection diagrams the
same SCV and NCV settings for start of injection have
been used to produce a conventional needle opening
with NOP of about 300 bar and the same start of
injection timing. This gives a rising injection pressure
during the main part of injection as with a single-actuator
EUI system.

A simulated heavy-duty transient Federal Test Procedure

(FTP) cycle result was calculated based on 17 steadystate test modes. A European cycle result (ECE-R49)
was calculated from the sum of the emissions measured
at 13 test modes.

90

NOZZLE

NCP NOx Smoke Delivery

bar ppm BSU
mm3/st
500 560
0.18
132.6
780 560
0.27
136.1
1020 540
0.31
137.2

10
8

INJECTION
RATE

6
4
2
0

800

INJECTION PRESSURE

Needle Lift (mm)

400

0.4

NEEDLE LIFT

0.2
0.0
-30

-20

-10

10

20

30

40

50

60

70

80

Crank Angle (ATDC)

Figure 3 Effect of increased NCP, two-actuator EUI(B), 8x0.18 nozzle, 1550 rev/min, 50% load, no EGR

100

2000

CYLINDER PRESSURE

90

70
60
50
40
30
20

1600
Injection Pressure (bar)

Cylinder Pressure (bar)

80

NOP Smoke Delivery

bar FSN
mm3/st
300 0.36
128.9
460 0.22
124.2
640 0.10
123.1
880 0.03
122.5
1100 0.03
122.0

1200

800

400

INJECTION PRESSURE

10
0

0.5
Needle Lift (mm)

0.4

0.3

NEEDLE LIFT

0.2

0.1
0.0

-30

-20

-10

10

20

30

40

50

60

70

80

Crank Angle (ATDC)

Figure 4 Effect of increasing NOP, two-actuator EUI(B), 8x0.20 nozzle, 0BTDC, 1550 rev/min, 50% load, no EGR
Basic effect of raising NOP with the NCV
NCP is increased from 500 to 1020 both smoke and
BSFC increase. Analysis suggests that this is due to the
greater quantity of fuel injected with less desirable spray
forms at low needle lifts when NCP is high. The
sensitivity of the combustion system to this effect varies
depending on the engine operating conditions. The twoactuator EUI system can be programmed to give an end
of injection condition with lowest particulate and BSFC
with due regard to nozzle blow-back. Subsequent test
work described below has been done with SCV and NCV
settings chosen to give moderate values of NCP, even
though this appears as a slower termination to the
injection rate than the sharp termination that can be
achieved with a high NCP. Also these optimised SCV
and NCV settings can have an additional benefit in
reducing the valve train noise as fuel is spilled at the end
of injection.
EFFECT OF USING THE NCV TO RAISE NOP AND
INJECTION PRESSURES AT MODE 12 (1550/50%)
This section illustrates the capabilities of the two-actuator
EUI to produce substantial increases in NOP and level of
injection pressure .

In Figure 4 the diagrams with the solid line are for SCV
and NCV valve settings which give a normal NOP of 300
bar and correspond to the injection characteristic
produced by a baseline single-actuator EUI system. The
other diagrams show the effect of closing the SCV earlier
while using the NCV to keep the same start of injection
timing. This produces substantial increases in the NOP
and in the injection pressures throughout the injection
period. Also the injection period is greatly reduced.
These results show that the two-actuator EUI system can
be electronically programmed to produce a wide range of
different levels of injection pressure at any particular
engine speed/load condition. The smoke level drops
progressively from a baseline value of 0.36 FSN for 300
bar NOP to 0.03 FSN for 1100 bar NOP, that is a factor
of 10 reduction in smoke. Figure 5 shows the
corresponding cumulative fuel input, injection rate and
cumulative heat release curves. After ignition and the
short period of pre-mixed heat release, the ordinates of
the cumulative heat release curve can be related to the
amount of fuel which has been mixed with oxygen since
the start of injection. These results confirm that the
global rate of air/fuel mixing and diffusion-controlled heat
release have been greatly increased. For example the
time from the start of injection to 50% heat release is
reduced from 19.75 CA to 12 CA when NOP is
increased from 300 to 1100 bar.

100

14

90

12

80

NOP
bar
300
640
1100

CYLINDER PRESSURE

70

Smoke Delivery
FSN
mm3/st
0.36
128.9
0.10
123.1
0.03
122.0

60

50

INJECTION
RATE

40

30

20

10

350

CUMULATIVE
FUEL INPUT

300

250

200

150

100

50

Needle Lift (mm)

CYLINDER PRESSURE

Cumulative Fuel Input (cal/g air)

Cumulative Heat Release (cal/g air)

10

Cylinder Pressure (bar)

Injection Rate (mm3/CA)

16

0.4

NEEDLE LIFT

0.3

CUMULATIVE
HEAT RELEASE

0.2

0.1

0.0
-30

-20

-10

10

20

30

40

50

60

70

80

Crank Angle (ATDC)

Figure 5 Effect of increased NOP on heat release, two-actuator EUI(B), 0BTDC, 1550 rev/min, 50% load, no EGR
Correlation of soot results with fuel spray jet model
These and other engine results obtained for the effect of
NOP with the two-actuator EUI(B) were further analysed
using an advanced phenomenological model of the fuel
spray jet (13) developed in the authors Company. This
model was validated against optical engine data (7) for a
range of injection conditions, air swirl levels and different
fuel types. The model is used to diagnose engine
combustion effects using an input of the engine test
conditions, the engine geometry and the injection
pressure and needle lift diagrams. One of the model
outputs is a calculated local rate of air/fuel mixing in the
airborne fuel spray jets. This model has been applied to
the engine results taken at the mode 12 condition as
shown in Figure 6. The x-axis values are a massaveraged value of the calculated local rates of air/fuel
mixing in units of air/fuel ratios per millisecond as the
injected fuel elements are entraining air and mixing
through a fuel-rich air/fuel ratio of 9 (RAF9). A higher
value of RAF9 means a shorter fuel element residence
time at fuel-rich conditions, which should reduce soot
formation. The results in Figure 6 show that there is
indeed a general correlation line between the measured
single-cylinder engine smoke levels and the rate of
air/fuel mixing calculated by the the fuel spray jet model
for different levels of NOP, injection pressure, injection
timings and for two nozzle configurations. This confirms

the importance of the rate of local air/fuel mixing on soot

formation.
The results from Figure 4 for NOP ranging from 300 to
1100 bar are the (+) points in Figure 6. The increase in
NOP from 300 to 1100 bar has increased the rate of
air/fuel mixing from 11.7 to 16.5 air/fuel ratios per
millisecond. This 41% increase in the rate of local
air/fuel mixing has given a 90% reduction of smoke.
Soot v NOx and BSFC v NOx trade off results with EGR
The results already discussed in Figures 4 and 5 are for
a constant start of injection timing without EGR and NOx
emissions increase with NOP. In practice the injection
timing would need to be retarded as the level of injection
pressure is increased in order to control NOx emission.
Also the combined effect of increased injection
pressures with increased levels of EGR to improve the
soot versus NOx trade off is of particular interest.
Figure 7 shows selected results for soot particulate
versus NOx and BSFC versus NOx as EGR is increased
from right to left. The first result () for the EGR swing
with an 8 x 0.18 nozzle and NOP of 325 bar is a baseline
EUI(B) result corresponding to a single actuator EUI.
For this case EGR can be used to reduce NOx to about
5.5 g/kW h and below which the soot increases rapidly
from a low level of about 0.02 g/kW h.

PEAK INJECTION PRESSURE

1600

1.4

1400

1.2

1200

1.0

1000
8x0.18 Timing swing NOP = 325 bar
8x0.18 NOP swing TDC
8x0.20 Timing swing NOP = 325 bar
8x0.20 NOP swing TDC
8x0.20 Increasing NOP, constant EOI
Correlation of measured smoke results
with calculated rate of air/fuel mixing

0.8

0.6

800

600

SMOKE
0.4

400

0.2

200

0.0

11

12

13

14
15
16
Calculated Rate of Air/Fuel Mixing (RAF9)

18

17

19

Peak Injection Pressure (bar)

Smoke (FSN)

1.6

Figure 6 Correlation of smoke results with rate of air/fuel mixing calculated by spray jet model.
Two-actuator EUI(B), 1550 rev/min, 50% load, no EGR
0.16

SOOT
NOP
bar
325
1000
1000

0.12

0.08

Soot (g/kW h)

Nozzle Timing
BTDC
8x0.18
9
8x0.18
3
8x0.20
3

0.04

0.00

BSFC

226

BSFC (g/kW h)

224

24.4%

222

INCR.
EGR%

18.6%

220

0%

22%

218

0%

216
0%

214

212

10
12
NOx (g/kW h)

14

16

18

20

22

Figure 7 Demonstration of soot and BSFC benefit with two-actuator EUI(B), EGR swing, 1550 rev/min, 50% load

0.40

Two-actuator EUI(B), 8x0.18 nozzle,

1550 rev/min, 50% load.

Boost Timing NOP

BTDC bar
100%
6
800
90%
6
800
90%
6
1200

0.30

0.20

Soot (g/kW h)

SOOT

0.10

0.00

228

BSFC

BSFC (g/kW h)

226

INCR.
EGR%

224

222

220

218
216
214

10
12
NOx (g/kW h)

14

16

18

20

22

Figure 8 Demonstration of soot reduction at reduced boost for transient emission reduction
The second result (x) is for the same nozzle but using
the NCV to raise NOP to 1000 bar while retarding the
start of injection from 9 to 3 BTDC to give a similar
NOx level with 0% EGR at the much higher injection
pressures. In this case EGR can be used to reduce NOx
to about 3.5 g/kW h before soot starts to increase
rapidly. Thus the increased NOP from 325 to 1000 bar
improves the tolerance to EGR and allows lower NOx
levels to be achieved (-36%) before soot becomes
unacceptable.
The comparison just discussed is for the 8 x 0.18 nozzle.
Previous tests for a single actuator EUI with an NOP of
325 bar showed that a larger nozzle flow with a 8 x 0.20
nozzle could be used to improve BSFC versus NOx, but
gave much higher soot levels, as would be expected
from the fuel spray jet model.
The third result ( ) is for the larger nozzle flow but using
the NCV to produce a high NOP of 1000 bar. The BSFC
versus NOx is considerably improved while the soot is
kept to a low level. Thus the combination of using the
NCV to increase the level of injection pressure together
with an increase of nozzle flow has been used to
donstrate a combined improvement of both soot versus
NOx and BSFC versus NOx trade off curves.
Tests with reduced boost to simulate turbocharger lag
For transient emission tests such as the US heavy-duty
FTP cycle the engine boost pressure can be lower during
a transient than the equivalent steady state value. For
example for a vehicle to commence an acceleration the

engine fuelling and load is suddenly increased and the

higher boost pressure normally associated with the
higher fuelling and load is not immediately achieved
owing to turbocharger lag. This can give a
disproportionate increase in soot emission. This effect
has been simulated on the single cylinder engine by
including steady state tests with 90% of the normal
steady-state boost pressure at the mode 12 condition.
Figure 8 shows results for the two-actuator EUI(B) with a
8 x 0.18 nozzle for soot particulate versus NOx as EGR
is increased from right to left. The first result () is for a
normal steady state boost at the mode 12 condition with
the NCV set to give an NOP of 800 bar. At a NOx level of
about 3.4 g/kW h this gives a low soot level of 0.062
g/kW h. The second result ()shows the effect of
reducing the air inlet boost pressure to 90% of that for
first result such as might occur during a turbocharger lag.
At about 3.4 g/kW h NOx the soot increases from 0.062
to 0.192 g/kW h (by x 3) owing to the reduced boost.
This represents what might happen for a short period
during the transient on the multi-cylinder engine if the
load is suddenly increased from a lower load condition to
the mode 12 condition.
The third result (x) shows the effect of using the NCV to
increase NOP from 800 to 1200 bar at the reduced
boost. At about 3.3 g/kW h NOx the soot level is reduced
from 0.192 to 0.085 g/kW h (-56%). This demonstrates
the potential of the two-actuator EUI to reduce transient
smoke by temporarily increasing the level of the injection
pressure until the normal boost is restored. This benefit

200

Nozzle

180

NOP Timing
bar BTDC
8x0.18 450
3
8x0.20 1500
0

CYLINDER PRESSURE

140

2000

120

100

80
60

40

20

1600
Injection Pressure (bar)

Cylinder Pressure (bar)

160

NOx Smoke Delivery

ppm FSN
mm3/st
455
0.65
235.2
395
0.28
218.9

1200

800

INJECTION PRESSURE

Needle Lift (mm)

400

0.4

NEEDLE LIFT

0.2
0.0
-30

-10

10

30

50

70

Crank Angle (ATDC)

Figure 9 Demonstration of soot and BSFC benefit for two-actuator EUI(B) with EGR for low NOx, 1900 rev/min, 100%
load
has been confirmed on a multicylinder engine with an
appropriate transient strategy.
To achieve this soot benefit in practice on a vehicle it is
important to achieve a very rapid increase in injection
pressure when load is suddenly applied. Also it is
important to be able to rapidly reduce the level of
injection pressure to the required steady-state value
once normal boost is restored. Otherwise there will be a
NOx penalty.
The two-actuator EUI provides shot-by-shot control of
the level of injection pressure so there is no inherent
delay in raising or lowering the level of injection pressure
such as occurs with common rail systems.
EFFECT OF USING NCV TO RAISE NOP AND
INJECTION PRESSURES AT MODE 19 (1900/100%)
The settings of the two-actuator EUI with a single
injection have been extensively explored at a number of
engine speed/load conditions. Significant benefits were
found with the two-actuator EUI compared with the
baseline case at different speed/load modes.
The results for a full load rated speed condition are given
in Figure 9.
This shows the injection diagrams

measured on the engine for a baseline case of a 8 x 0.18

nozzle with NOP of 450 bar and EGR to give a low NOx
level. This would correspond to a single-actuator EUI
result. For the second result in Figure 9 the NCV was
used to raise NOP from 450 to 1500 bar and this gave
greatly increased injection pressures and a much shorter
injection period. This combined with a change to a 8 x
0.20 nozzle gave 57% lower smoke with lower NOx ppm
and a lower fuel consumption.

SIMULATED EMISSION CYCLE RESULTS WITH

A SINGLE INJECTION
The NCV and SCV settings of the two-actuator EUI
system were optimised in combination with injection
timing and EGR for a number of steady-state test modes
on the single-cylinder engine. These steady-state engine
results were then used to derive the heavy-duty
emissions cycle results. The results shown are
effectively engine-out values. The particulate values are
not directly measured but calculated from the measured
smoke and HC values as described in Section 3.2
above.

CYCLE
BSFC

g/bhp h

170
165

-5%

160

Conventional EUI(A), 8x0.18 nozzle with 325 NOP+EGR

Two-actuator EUI(B), 8x0.20 nozzle optimised with high NOP+EGR

155
150

0.12

0.06

g/bhp h

0.08

CALCULATED
TOTAL
PARTICULATE
(No oxidation
catalyst)

US 94

Oxy.
Cat.

US 98

US 2002/04
(NOx+NMHC)

0.10

0.04
0.02

0.08

0.00

g/bhp h

0.06

SOOT
PARTICULATE

0.04
0.02
0.00

10

NOx g/bhp h

Figure 10 Simulated US FTP emissions cycle results for heavy-duty truck with no aftertreatment

SIMULATED US HEAVY-DUTY FTP CYCLE RESULTS

(STEADY-STATE SIMULATION)
The results shown in Figure 10 are for a 17 mode
simulation of the US HD FTP cycle. This simulation does
not take account of transient effects on the FTP cycle.
The baseline result is for a conventional single-actuator
EUI(A) with a 8 x 0.18 nozzle and shows the emissions
trade off with EGR. The levels of EGR used on the left
end of the curve gave 2.5 g/bhp h NOx with 0.062 g/bhp
h soot particulate and 0.109 g/bhp h calculated total
particulate.
The two-actuator EUI(B) with a 8 x 0.20 nozzle and
optimised NCV and SCV settings was tested with EGR
and gave a much improved result. The NOx level was
reduced to 2.13 g/bhp h, the soot particulate to 0.021
g/bhp h and the calculated total particulate to 0.061
g/bhp h. If we compare these results for the optimised
two-actuator EUI(B) with the results for single-actuator
EUI(A) baseline, then the two-actuator EUI(B) gave 15%
lower NOx, 66% lower soot particulate, 44% lower
calculated total particulate and in addition the emission
cycle BSFC is 5% lower.
This lower soot and particulate versus NOx result
demonstrates the substantial improvement in the
tolerance of the combustion system to accept high levels
of EGR and with low BSFC using the two-actuator EUI
system and is within the US 02/04 requirement. These
results however are calculated from steady values and

do not take account of transient control system lags with

external EGR or of transient increases of soot and
particulate emission from turbocharger lag. As discussed
in Section 4.2.4 above the shot-to-shot capabilities of the
two-actuator EUI can be used to mitigate the
turbocharger lag effects on soot and particulate
emission.
EUROPEAN ECE CYCLE RESULTS
The results shown in Figure 11 are for an ECE cycle.
Conversion factors were used to translate the test results
measured on an R49 cycle to OICA cycle values for
comparison with the EURO III and EURO IV
requirements.
The baseline result is for a conventional single-actuator
EUI(A) with a 8 x 0.18 nozzle and shows the emissions
trade off with EGR. Zero EGR gave 5.5 g/kW h NOx and
a low soot particulate of 0.015 g/kW h while the levels of
EGR used on the left end of the curve gave 3.8 g/kW h
but with a much higher soot particulate of 0.053 g/kW h.
The two-actuator EUI(B) with a 8 x 0.20 nozzle and
optimised NCV and SCV settings was tested with EGR to
reduce the NOx level to 2.7 g/kW h. At this low NOx

g/kW h

220

CYCLE
BSFC

-6%

215
210

Conventional EUI(A), 8x0.18 nozzle with 325 NOP+EGR

Two-actuator EUI(B), 8x0.20 nozzle optimised with high NOP+EGR

205

0.12

200

EURO 2

EURO 3

0.08

Oxy.
Cat.

EURO 4

EURO 5

0.10

0.06

g/kW h

0.08

CALCULATED
TOTAL
PARTICULATE
(No oxidation
catalyst)

0.04
0.02
0.00

g/kW h

0.06

SOOT
PARTICULATE

0.04

0.02

0.00

Further
Optimisation

10

NOx g/kW h

Figure 11 Simulated ECE emissions cycle results for heavy-duty truck with no aftertreatment
level the soot particulate was 0.021 g/kW h. If we
compare the EGR results for the optimised two-actuator
EUI(B) with the EGR results for single-actuator EUI(A)
baseline, then the two-actuator EUI(B) gave 30% lower
NOx, 60% lower soot particulate and in addition the
emission cycle BSFC is 6% lower.

regeneration such as a DPF or a NOx absorber catalyst

system. For this purpose the two-actuator EUI can
produce a late low-pressure post injection which is
beneficial to minimise liquid spray over-penetration and
cylinder wall wetting with injection late on the expansion
stroke.

This lower soot versus NOx result demonstrates the

substantial improvement in the tolerance of the
combustion system to accept high levels of EGR to
achieve low NOx and with low BSFC using the twoactuator EUI system.

MULTIPLE INJECTION

The calculated total engine-out particulate level shown in

Figure 11 is high compared with the EURO IV
requirement.
This total particulate level could be
reduced towards the soot particulate value and the
EURO IV requirement by measures such as an oxidation
catalyst in combination with a low sulphur fuel. Also
further optimisation of the combustion system including
measures such as the use of a close high-pressure post
as described below could be used to further reduce the
soot and hence total particulate, as indicated in Figure
11.
The two-actuator EUI system can also provide a late
post injection if this is required for after-treatment

All of the results shown above are for a single injection

during a single combustion event. This section illustrates
the capabilities of the two-actuator EUI in producing pilot
and post multiple injections.
PILOT INJECTION
The introduction of a pilot injection before a main
injection can be used to reduce combustion noise. In the
work presented here the primary requirement was to
seek improvements in the soot/NOx or BSFC/NOx
emissions trade off. Previous investigations on the use of
pilot injection to reduce combustion noise and or NOx
have often led to an adverse effect on smoke, soot and
particulate emissions (5, 14). The two-actuator EUI(B)
was used below to demonstrate the effect on emissions
and BSFC of two different methods of producing a pilot
and a main injection without EGR at the mode 12
condition.

100
90

2000

CYLINDER PRESSURE

Smoke
BSU
0.21
0.54
(+157%)

70
60
50
40
30
20
10

1600
Injection Pressure (bar)

Cylinder Pressure (bar)

80

NOx Delivery
ppm mm3/st
570
135.1
530
134.2
(-7%)

1200

800

400

INJECTION PRESSURE

Needle Lift (mm)

0
0.3
0.2

NEEDLE LIFT

0.1
0.0
-30

-10

10

30

50

70

Crank Angle (ATDC)

Figure 12 Effect of SCV pilot, two-actuator EUI(B), 8x0.18 nozzle, 1550 rev/min, 50% load, no EGR

Figure 12 shows injection diagrams and results for the

first method of pilot. The first result (solid line) is for a
main-only injection with a normal spring NOP and
corresponds to a baseline single-actuator EUI. The
second result (dotted line) is for a pilot produced by
opening the SCV to spill fuel and terminate the pilot and
then to close it again to build up pressure for the main
injection. This method of pilot is termed a 'SCV pilot' or
'spill pilot' and can be produced by a single actuator EUI.
Figure 12 shows that the SCV pilot reduced NOx by 7%
for a similar fuelling, but smoke increased by 157%
compared with a main-only injection. It is evident that for
the SCV pilot the injection pressure in the main injection
is somewhat lower than for the main-only injection. This
lower pressure is expected since less fuel is pumped
during the main injection and this is one reason why the
smoke is higher with this method of pilot injection.
Combustion noise was not measured in these tests but
the smoother development of cylinder pressure suggests
a lower level.
Figure 13 shows injection diagrams and results for the
second method of pilot injection. The first result (solid
line) is for a main-only injection with normal spring NOP
and corresponds to a baseline single-actuator EUI. The
second result (dotted line) is for a pilot produced by
operating the NCV valve to close the nozzle needle and
terminate the pilot and then operating it again to
commence the main injection. This is termed a NCV pilot
and this has a very different effect to the SCV pilot. With

the NCV pilot the injection pressure in the main injection

is now much higher than for the main-only injection since
injection pressure can build up when the needle is closed
between pilot and main injections.
The results in Figure 13 show that the NCV pilot gave
5% lower fuel delivery with 20% lower smoke at a similar
NOx compared with the main-only injection. Also there is
a smoother development of the cylinder pressure
compared with main-only.
These results demonstrate the capability of the twoactuator EUI to produce a pilot injection which can give
benefits in combustion noise and BSFC versus NOx
without incurring a smoke penalty.
POST INJECTION
The use of a post injection shortly after the main injection
is known to have potential combustion benefits (15, 16)
especially for soot reduction. The use of a close post
injection has been investigated here.
A two-actuator EUI(E3) with a 6 x 0.24 nozzle was used
to explore the potential benefits of adding a post after the
main injection. The post injection can be achieved by
electronically programming the SCV and NCV to
terminate the main injection and then to allow the nozzle
needle to re-open for the post injection. If only the NCV
is operated to close the nozzle needle between main and
post injection, the injection pressure can be raised to a
high level giving a high-pressure post injection. If only

100
90

2000

CYLINDER PRESSURE

Smoke
BSU
(Ref.) 0.20
0.16
(-20%)

70
60
50
40
30
20
10

1600
Injection Pressure (bar)

Cylinder Pressure (bar)

80

NOx
ppm
495
495

Delivery
mm3/st
141.1
133.9
(-5%)

1200

800

400

INJECTION PRESSURE

Needle Lift (mm)

0
0.3

NEEDLE LIFT

0.2
0.1
0.0
-30

-10

10

30

50

70

Crank Angle (ATDC)

Figure 13 Effect of NCV pilot, two-actuator EUI(B), 8x0.18 nozzle, 1550 rev/min, no EGR
the SCV is operated between main and post, this gives a
low-pressure post injection.
For the results shown in Figure 14, three different
combinations of NCV and SCV settings were used to
produce a similar main injection but with a post injection
having three different levels of injection pressure while
retaining a similar post timing and needle lift diagram.
The purpose of this comparison is to show the effect of
pressure in the post injection. From the results in Figure
14 it is clear that increase of post injection pressure
reduces soot emission. The highest-pressure post (over
2000 bar) gives the lowest soot emission with no change
in NOx. This capability of the two-actuator EUI concept to
increase injection pressure in the post injection
compared with the main injection is not readily
achievable with other types of FIE system. The effect of
different post injection separations relative to the main
injection and different post quantities have been
investigated.
Figure 15 shows results for an injection diagram with a
main injection plus an optimised high pressure post
injection compared with a main-only injection diagram.
In both cases the timing and NOP for the main injection
was set to be similar and with a relatively low main NOP.
The main-only result corresponds to a baseline singleactuator EUI. The effect of using the 2-actuator EUI to
generate the main plus high-pressure post injection was
to reduce smoke by 58% for a similar BSFC versus NOx.

This shows that the addition of a post injection with less

fuel injected in the main injection can be used to reduce
soot particulate compared with a single main-only
injection with comparable NOx and BSFC. The baseline
result shown in Figure 15, however, is for a conventional
low NOP main injection. There is a need to compare an
optimised post injection result with an optimised single
injection using the full flexibility of the two-actuator EUI
system in both cases.
The results in Figure 16 show soot versus NOx and
BSFC versus NOx taken with the two-actuator EUI(E3).
The first result () is an injection timing swing for a single
main-only injection with 325 NOP and corresponds to a
baseline result for a single-actuator EUI.
The second curve of results () for a single main-only
injection shows the effect of using the two-actuator
EUI(E3) to increase the NOP with the injection timing set
to give 6.2 g/kW h NOx at the baseline NOP. As NOP is
increased from left to right there is a clear improvement
in soot versus NOx trade off compared with the baseline
results at low NOP. This shows the improvement in soot
versus NOx with a high NOP single injection. For these
tests the main injection timing was adjusted to give a
constant end of injection as NOP was increased. At a
NOx level of 7 g/kW h (no EGR) the soot level is reduced
by 35% using the high NOP single injection compared
with the baseline result.

Injection
diagram
High pressure post
Med. pressure post
Low pressure post

100

CYLINDER PRESSURE

90

NOx Smoke Delivery

ppm FSN
mm3/st
552
0.17
138.5
552
0.23
140.2
551
0.48
136.7

2000

70
60

1600

40
30

20
10
0

1200

800

INJECTION PRESSURE
0.5

400

Needle Lift (mm)

50
Injection Pressure (bar)

Cylinder Pressure (bar)

80

0.4

0.3
0.2

NEEDLE LIFT

0.1
0.0

-30

-10

30

10

70

50

Crank Angle (ATDC)

Figure 14 Effect of main with different post injection pressures, two-actuator EUI(E3), 0.38 cam, 6x0.24 nozzle,
1550 rev/min, 50% load, no EGR
2800

180

2400

140

Main only
Main+post

120

100

80

60

40
20

Injection Pressure (bar)

Cylinder Pressure (bar)

160

2000

NOx Smoke
ppm FSN
590 0.60
638 0.25

Delivery
mm3/st
131.7
129.9

CYLINDER PRESSURE

1600

1200

INJECTION PRESSURE

800

Needle Lift (mm)

400

0.3

0.2

NEEDLE LIFT

0.1
0.0
-30

-10

10

30

50

70

Crank Angle (ATDC)

Figure 15 Effect of main+post injection, EUI(E3), 0.38 cam, 6x0.24 nozzle, 1550 rev/min, 50% load, no EGR

0.24

0.20

Timing swing NOP=325 bar

NOP swing (constant end of injection timing)
Effect of different post quantity, main NOP=325 bar

SOOT

0.12

Soot (g/kW h)

0.16

0.08

260

255

BSFC (g/kW h)

250

0.04

245

240

0.00

235

BSFC

230

225

220

215

210

10
12
NOx (g/kW h)

14

16

18

20

22

Figure 16 Comparison of single injection diagrams with normal and increased NOP and main plus post injection, EUI(E3),
0.38 cam, 6x0.24 nozzle, 1550 rev/min, 50% load, no EGR
The third set of results ( ) are for a main injection plus a
post injection with different post injection quantities.
These results show a further reduction in soot emission
with post injection of about 47% with no penalty in BSFC
compared with the second result for a high NOP single
injection. This demonstrates the potential for further
improvement in the emissions trade off curves by using
the two-actuator EUI to add a post injection.
The two-actuator EUI can also be programmed to
generate a pilot injection, main injection and post
injection. Figure 17 shows a result taken with a pilot, a
main and a post injection and the comparison with a
single main injection. In this case the NCV has been
used to close the nozzle needle between pilot and main
and between main and post injection. This results in a
progressively increasing injection pressure from pilot to
main to post injection. This provides for a low-pressure
pilot which is useful to reduce combustion noise if
required, a higher-pressure main injection and a highpressure post injection compared with a baseline mainonly diagram. This illustrates the capability of the twoactuator EUI system to produce a very flexible control of
injection characteristic.

In parallel work at the authors' Company, an advanced

two-actuator electronic unit pump (EUP) fuel injection
system has been developed. This includes a unit pump
with an electronically controlled SCV and a Smart
injector with an electronically controlled NCV and can be
applied to engines designed for unit pump systems. Test
work shows that this advanced two-actuator EUP system
can provide similar injection characteristics and benefits
to those described here for the advanced two-actuator
EUI system.

CONCLUSIONS
A very flexible choice of injection characteristics can be
produced by an advanced electronic unit injector which
has been developed with two electronically-controlled
valves. Tests on a single-cylinder engine have
demonstrated the potential of this advanced EUI system.
Substantial increases in injection pressure can be
programmed electronically at individual engine
speed/load conditions compared with a baseline EUI
system. This can be used to achieve much faster rates
of air/fuel mixing and a substantial reduction in soot
emission especially when used in combination with EGR

180

140
120
100

Main only
Pilot/main/post

CYLINDER PRESSURE

2000

NOx Smoke Delivery

ppm FSN mm3/st
590
0.60 131.7
757
0.21 128.0

80

40
20
0

1600

1200

800

INJECTION PRESSURE
400

Needle Lift (mm)

60

Injection Pressure (bar)

Cylinder Pressure (bar)

160

0.3
0.2

NEEDLE LIFT

0.1
0.0
-30

-10

10

30

50

70

Crank Angle (ATDC)

Figure 17 Demonstration of pilot, main and post injections, two-actuator EUI(E3), 0.38 cam, 6x0.24 nozzle,
1550 rev/min, 50% load, no EGR

for low soot at low NOx levels. The level of injection

pressure can be controlled on a shot-by-shot basis which
can be used to reduce transient soot emission during
turbocharger lag. Also the flexibility in the injection
characteristics allow scope for re-optimisation of the
nozzle configuration.
A steady state simulation of the US FTP cycle with EGR
showed that an optimised result with the two-actuator
EUI gave 66% lower soot particulate, 15% lower NOx
and 5% lower cycle BSFC compared with a baseline
single-actuator EUI result.
Emissions cycle results with EGR for a European ECE
R49 cycle showed that an optimised result with the twoactuator EUI gave 60% lower soot particulate, 30% lower
NOx and 6% lower BSFC compared with a baseline
single-actuator EUI result.
Further engine test work shows that the two-actuator EUI
system can be used to produce multiple injections with
different levels of injection pressure in the pilot, main and
post injection. Without EGR an NCV pilot injection gave
5% lower BSFC and 20% lower smoke for a similar NOx
compared with a reference main-only injection. A highpressure post injection gave a 47% reduction in soot
emission for similar NOx and BSFC compared with a
high-pressure main-only injection.
Overall the results demonstrate the significant
contribution which an advanced two-actuator EUI system

can make towards reducing engine out emissions for

future heavy-duty trucks.

ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS
The authors wish to thank the Directors of Delphi Diesel
Systems for permission to publish this paper, Hermann
Breitbach, Chief Engineer Gillingham Innovation Centre,
and David Draper, Chief Engineer Heavy-Duty Business,
for their support and comments. Thanks are also due to
the Heavy-Duty Engineering team at Concord Road Park
Royal for their support with the advanced EUI system
and to Colin North for carrying out the spray model
calculations.

REFERENCES
1. Frankl G, Barker B G, Timms C T, "Electronic unit
injectors - revised", SAE 891001.
2. Frankl G, Barker B G, Timms C T, "Electronic unit
injectors - revised", SAE 891001.
3. Tullis S, Greeves G, "Contribution of EUI-200 and
quiescent combustion system towards US94
emissions", SAE 930274.
4. Soteriou C C E, Smith M, "From concept to end
product - computer simulation in the development of
EUI-200", SAE 960866.
5. Tullis S, Greeves G, "Improving NOx versus BSFC
with EUI-200 using EGR and pilot injection for heavyduty diesel engines", SAE 960843.

6. Havenith C, Verbeck R P, "Transient performance of

a urea deNOx catalyst for low emission heavy-duty
diesel engines", SAE 970185.
7. Browne K R, Partridge I M, Greeves G, "Fuel
property effects on fuel/air mixing in an experimental
diesel engine", SAE 860223.
8. Greeves G, Meehan J O, "Measurement of
instantaneous soot concentration in a diesel
combustion chamber", paper C88/75, I. Mech. E.,
19975.
9. Khan I M, Greeves G, Wang C H T, "Factors
affecting smoke and gaseous emissions from direct
injection engines and a method of calculation", SAE
730169.
10. Tullis S, Greeves G, "HSDI emission reduction with
common rail FIE", Seminar on Fuel Injection
Systems, I.Mech.E., S492/S18/99.
11. Guerrassi N, Dupraz P, "A common rail injection
system for high speed direct injection diesel
engines", SAE 980803.
12. Greeves G, Wang C H T, "Origins of diesel
particulate mass emissions", SAE 810260.
13. Partridge I M, Greeves G, "Interpreting diesel
combustion with a fuel spray computer model",
Conference on Combustion in Engines and Hybrid
Vehicles, I.Mech.E., C529/025/98.
14. Minami, T, Takeuchi K, Shimazaki N, "Reduction of
diesel engine NOx using pilot injection", SAE
950611.
15. Benajes J, Molina S, Garcia J M, "Influence of preand post-injection performance and pollutant
emissions in a H D diesel engine", SAE 2001-010526.
16. Montgomery D T, Reitz R D, "Effects of multiple
injections and flexible control of boost and EGR on
emissions and fuel consumption of a heavy-duty
diesel engine ", SAE 2001-01-0195.

DEFINITIONS, ACRONYMS, ABBREVIATIONS

DPF:

- Diesel particulate filter

EGR:

- Exhaust gas recirculation

EUI:

- Electronic unit injector

FIE:

- Fuel injection equipment

FSN:

- Filter smoke number

FTP:

- Federal test procedure

NCV:

- Needle control valve

NCP:

- Nozzle closing pressure

NOP:

- Nozzle opening pressure

RAF9: - Rate of air/fuel mixing as fuel elements mix

through an air/fuel ratio of 9. (air/fuel ratios per ms).
Rs:

- Rig swirl ratio

SCR:

- Selective catalytic reduction

SCV:

- Spill control valve

SOF:

- Soluble organic fraction of the particulate